Last year an amendment was incorporated in the measure providing for
the Secret Service, which provided that there should be no detail from
the Secret Service and no transfer therefrom. It is not too much to say
that this amendment has been of benefit only, and could be of benefit
only, to the criminal classes. If deliberately introduced for the
purpose of diminishing the effectiveness of war against crime it could
not have been better devised to this end. It forbade the practices that
had been followed to a greater or less extent by the executive heads of
various departments for twenty years. To these practices we owe the
securing of the evidence which enabled us to drive great lotteries out
of business and secure a quarter of a million of dollars in fines from
their promoters. These practices have enabled us to get some of the
evidence indispensable in order in connection with the theft of
government land and government timber by great corporations and by
individuals. These practices have enabled us to get some of the
evidence indispensable in order to secure the conviction of the
wealthiest and most formidable criminals with whom the Government has
to deal, both those operating in violation of the anti-trust law and
others. The amendment in question was of benefit to no one excepting to
these criminals, and it seriously hampers the Government in the
detection of crime and the securing of justice. Moreover, it not only
affects departments outside of the Treasury, but it tends to hamper the
Secretary of the Treasury himself in the effort to utilize the
employees of his department so as to best meet the requirements of the
public service. It forbids him from preventing frauds upon the customs
service, from investigating irregularities in branch mints and assay
offices, and has seriously crippled him. It prevents the promotion of
employees in the Secret Service, and this further discourages good
effort. In its present form the restriction operates only to the
advantage of the criminal, of the wrongdoer. The chief argument in
favor of the provision was that the Congressmen did not themselves wish
to be investigated by Secret Service men. Very little of such
investigation has been done in the past; but it is true that the work
of the Secret Service agents was partly responsible for the indictment
and conviction of a Senator and a Congressman for land frauds in
Oregon. I do not believe that it is in the public interest to protect
criminally in any branch of the public service, and exactly as we have
again and again during the past seven years prosecuted and convicted
such criminals who were in the executive branch of the Government, so
in my belief we should be given ample means to prosecute them if found
in the legislative branch. But if this is not considered desirable a
special exception could be made in the law prohibiting the use of the
Secret Service force in investigating members of the Congress. It would
be far better to do this than to do what actually was done, and strive
to prevent or at least to hamper effective action against criminals by
the executive branch of the Government.